My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/04/2006 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
2006
>
04/04/2006 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2014 8:50:00 AM
Creation date
1/6/2014 9:43:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
4/4/2006
Year
2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Council Minutes of 4/4/Q6 <br />neighboring property line, and a patio or deck will come quite close to the adjacent <br />industrial area. Landscaping beds and development signage have been provided at the <br />main entrance. The base of the sign will match the stone of the individual building units. <br />The landscaping bed will actually sit on an adjacent property pursuant to an easement. It <br />comes around the corner, where it's split off the one parcel, there will actually be an <br />easement to accommodate landscaping and signage. Landscaping will be provided at the <br />front and around the partial side of each single and attached unit. Additional landscape <br />groupings of trees, shrubs and perennials are provided in seven locations around the <br />development. Evergreen screening is provided around the two detention basins near the <br />French Creek and along the south property line about 300 feet from Bradley. All <br />evergreens used for screening would be 8 feet in height at planting and will be located on <br />the banks of the detention area so as not to impeded drainage. Trees are to be preserved <br />in the buffer area around the rear perimeter of the site. It is anticipated, however, that <br />some trees may be impacted. The City Forester would be involved in identifying those to <br />be preserved. Access, parking and traffic were also discussed. The development has a <br />single access point on Bradley Road. However, plans do show a potential location for a <br />connection to a possible future expansion area near the hammerhead. There is visitor <br />parking provided in five locations around the development. Sidewalks are on both sides <br />of the street. The city had requested that the applicant submit a traffic study including <br />trip generation figures and level of service analysis. The findings of the traffic study are <br />that the development would not significantly impact existing levels of service at <br />Barton/Bradley. A traffic signal analysis did not indicate that a signal is warranted at this <br />location. As to lighting, there are 10 decorative, lantern-type style lights that have been <br />proposed. The light poles will be 15 foot in height and will be located on the interior of <br />the sidewalk at 150 foot intervals. There were some engineering issues that remain <br />outstanding. The French Creek runs midway through this property so that a bridge <br />crossing is necessary. Stormwater management will be provided by the above-ground <br />detention basins. This then would flow into the creek. This would create an access poinr <br />that's controlled as opposed to just running off into the creek. Yard drains between units <br />will direct stormwater to the basins. Yard drains were added throughout the entire <br />proposal. The land swales back from the edge of the property near industrial, so the water <br />is retained on the site. City Engineer Cathy Becker made it clear that certain starrnwater <br />prerequisites had not yet been met concerning the French Creek. These included missing <br />hydraulic calculations, missing revised sanitary and storm easements, a missing <br />landscaping plan and soil boring information, along with foundation requirement <br />information. Councilman Gareau recommended that this information would not be <br />submitted until a further discussion had occurred concerning rezoning of the parcel. <br />There are two issues: rezoning and the project approval itself. The committee felt it <br />would be not necessarily appropriate to require that expense and effort at this point <br />without further discussion on the rezoning. The Planning Commission recommended that <br />the street be constructed with concrete overlaid with asphalt rather than concrete alone. <br />Curbs will be barrier curbs per the city subdivision requirements, All utilities will be <br />placed underground. The meeting was attended by a number of area residents who spoke <br />on numerous issues-some were on different sides of the same issue. Several residents <br />spoke out of concern for a change in the zoning generally. Some spoke in favor of that to <br />the adjacent residential area where the condos are, and some spoke against the rezoning <br />and those were the property owners affected by the rezone. There was a discussion had <br />about the concept of the rezoning being a rezoning of all parcels in the area or none at all. <br />There was discussion had concerning the screening or buffering being insufficient as it <br />concerns not only the condominiums but also the adjacent industrial properties. There <br />was discussion that the rezoning would have an adverse impact upon the adjacent <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.